Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 19, Issue 11, pp 2671–2696

Host odor and visual stimulus interaction during intratree host finding behavior ofRhagoletis pomonella flies

  • Martin Aluja
  • Ronald J. Prokopy


Responses ofRhagoletis pomonella (Walsh) (Diptera: Tephritidae) flies to host fruit visual stimuli (apples or models of apples) and chemical stimuli (synthetic apple volatile blend) were studied in semidwarf field-caged apple trees. Three different fruit or model densities (1, 4, or 16 fruit or models/ tree) and two odor release rates [ca. 0.7μg/hr (close to the natural release rate of a ripe apple) and ca. 500μg/hr (amount of odor released by commercially sold apple maggot traps)] were tested. Individually released flies were followed as they moved within a tree for a maximum of 20 min. We recorded three-dimensional search paths followed by foraging flies and computed such variables as total relative distance traveled before alighting on a fruit or model, track length between individual alightment sites, and directness of flight to fruits or models. Effect of odor on propensity to alight on fruit or models and host-searching behavior prior to alighting on fruit or on models varied according to fruit or model color and density. If the fruit visual stimulus was strong (e.g., red color), odor did not increase the probability of finding fruit or fruit models. As the visual stimulus became progressively weaker (red to green to clear), odor (irrespective of concentration) appeared to aid flies during the fruit-finding process. As density of fruit or models increased, the probability of flies finding a fruit or model also increased (e.g., 50% of flies found a red fruit model at 1 model/tree while 90% found a red model at 16 models/tree; 4% of flies found a clear model with odor at 1 model/tree while 35% found a clear model with odor at 16 models/tree). Findings reported elsewhere indicate thatR. pomonella flies are able to discover a point source of odor (an odor-bearing tree in a patch of trees) by flying upwind (in the tree patch) in response to intermittent exposure to odor. Findings here indicate that after arrival on a host tree (point source), flies discover individual apparent and abundant host fruit on the basis of vision. If fruit are less apparent or scarce, odor appears to interact with vision during the fruit-finding process.

Key words

Rhagoletis pomonella Diptera Tephritidae vision olfaction fruit volatiles behavior movement patterns 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agee, H.R. 1985. Spectral response of the compound eye of the wild and laboratory-reared apple maggot fly,Rhagoletis pomonella.J. Agric. Entomol. 2:147–154.Google Scholar
  2. Agnello, A.M., Spangler, S.M., andReissig, W.H. 1990. Development and evolution of a more efficient monitoring system for apple maggot (Diptera: Tephritidae).J. Econ. Entomol. 83:539–546.Google Scholar
  3. Aluja, M., andProkopy, R.J. 1992. Host search behaviour byRhagoletis pomonella flies: Intertree movement patterns in response to wind-borne fruit volatiles under field conditions.Physiol. Entomol. 17:1–8.Google Scholar
  4. Aluja, M., Prokopy, R.J., Elkinton, J.S., andLaurence, F. 1989. Novel approach for tracking and quantifying the movement patterns of insects in three dimensions under seminatural conditions.Environ. Entomol. 18:1–7.Google Scholar
  5. Aluja, M., Prokopy, R.J., Buonaccorsi, J.P., andCardé, R.T. 1993. Wind tunnel assays of olfactory responses ofRhagoletis pomonella flies to wind-borne apple volatiles.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 68:99–108.Google Scholar
  6. Averill, A.L., Reissig, W.H., andRoelofs, W.L. 1988. Specificity of olfactory responses in the tephritid fruit fly,Rhagoletis pomonella.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 47:211–222.Google Scholar
  7. BMDP 1987. BMDP Statistical Software Version 87. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  8. Borden, J.H., Hunt, D.W.A., Miller, D.R., andSlessor, K.N. 1986. Orientation in forest Coleoptera: An uncertain outcome of responses by individual beetles to variable stimuli, pp. 97–109,in T.L. Payne, M.C. Birch, and C.E.J. Kennedy (eds.). Mechanisms in Insect Olfaction. Clarendon Press, Oxford, U.K.Google Scholar
  9. Brady, J., Packer, M.J., andGibson, G. 1990. Odour plume shape and host finding by tsetse.Insect Sci. Applic. 11:377–384.Google Scholar
  10. Fein, B.L., Reissig, W.H., andRoelofs, W.L. 1982. Identification of apple volatiles attractive to the apple maggot,Rhagoletis pomonella.J. Chem. Ecol. 8:1473–1487.Google Scholar
  11. Gibson, G., Packer, M.J., Steullet, P., andBrady, J. 1991. Orientation of tsetse flies to wind, within and outside host odour plumes in the field.Physiol. Entomol. 16:47–56.Google Scholar
  12. Green, C.H. 1986. Effects of colours and synthetic odours on the attraction ofGlossina pallidipes andG. morsitans morsitans to traps and screens.Physiol. Entomol. 11:411–421.Google Scholar
  13. Harris, M.O., andMiller, J.R. 1983. Color stimuli and oviposition behavior of the onion fly,Delia antiqua (Meigen).Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 76:766–771.Google Scholar
  14. Harris, M.O., andMiller, J.O. 1991. Quantitative analysis of ovipositional behavior: Effects of a host-plant chemical on the onion fly (Diptera: Anthomyiidae).J. Insect Behav. 4:773–792.Google Scholar
  15. Judd, G.J. 1986. Integration of visual and olfactory host-finding mechanisms in the onion maggot,Delia antiqua (Meigen) (Diptera: Anthomyiidae). PhD dissertation. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia.Google Scholar
  16. Kogan, M. 1977. The role of chemical factors in insect/plant interactions.Proc. Int. Congr. Entomol., Washington D. C. 1976:211–227.Google Scholar
  17. Moericke, V., Prokopy, R.J., Berlocher, S., andBush, G.L. 1975. Visual stimuli eliciting attraction ofRhagoletis pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae) flies to trees.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 13:524–534.Google Scholar
  18. Oatman, E.R. 1964. Apple maggot trap and attractant studies.J. Econ. Entomol. 57:529–531.Google Scholar
  19. Owens, E.D. 1982. The effects of hue, intensity and saturation on foliage and fruit finding in the apple maggot. PhD thesis. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  20. Owens, E.D., andProkopy, R.J. 1984. Habitat background characteristics influencingRhagoletis pomonella (Walsh) (Dipt., Tephritidae) fly response to foliar and fruit mimic traps.Z. Angew. Entomol. 98:98–103.Google Scholar
  21. Owens, E.D., andProkopy, R.J. 1986. Relationship between reflectance spectra of host plant surfaces and visual detection of host fruit byRhagoletis pomonella flies.Physiol. Entomol. 11:297–307.Google Scholar
  22. Payne, T.L. 1986. Olfaction and vision in host finding by a bark beetle, pp. 112–116,in T.L. Payne, M.C. Birch, and C.E.J. Kennedy (eds.). Mechanisms in Insect Olfaction. Clarendon Press, Oxford, U.K.Google Scholar
  23. Prokopy, R.J. 1968. Visual responses of apple maggot flies,Rhagoletis pomonella: Orchard studies.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 11:403–422.Google Scholar
  24. Prokopy, R.J. 1973. Dark enamel spheres capture as many apple maggot flies as fluorescent spheres.Environ. Entomol. 2:953–954.Google Scholar
  25. Prokopy, R.J. 1975. Apple maggot control by sticky red spheres.J. Econ. Entomol. 68:197–198.Google Scholar
  26. Prokopy, R.J. 1977. Attraction ofRhagoletis flies to red spheres of different sizes.Can. Entomol. 109:593–596.Google Scholar
  27. Prokopy, R.J. 1986. Visual and olfactory stimulus interaction in resource finding by insects, pp. 81–89,in T.L. Payne et al., (eds.). Mechanisms in Insect Olfaction. Clarendon Press, Oxford, U.K.Google Scholar
  28. Prokopy, R.J. 1991. A small low-input commercial apple orchard in eastern North America: management and economics.Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 33:353–362.Google Scholar
  29. Prokopy, R.J., andOwens, E.D. 1978. Visual generalist and visual specialist phytophagous insects: Host selection behaviour and application to management.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 24:409–420.Google Scholar
  30. Prokopy, R.J., andOwens, E.D. 1983. Visual detection of plants by herbivorous insects.Annu. Rev. Entomol. 28:337–364.Google Scholar
  31. Prokopy, R.J., Moericke, V., andBush, G.L. 1973. Attraction of apple maggot flies to odor of apples.Environ. Entomol. 2:743–749.Google Scholar
  32. Prokopy, R.J., Johnson, S.A., andO'brien, M.T. 1990. Second-stage integrated management of apple arthropod pests.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 54:9–19.Google Scholar
  33. Reissig, W.H. 1974. Field tests of the response ofRhagoletis pomonella to apples.Environ. Entomol. 3:733–736.Google Scholar
  34. Reissig, W.H., Fein, B.L., andRoelofs, W.L. 1982. Field tests of synthetic apple volatiles as apple maggot (Diptera: Tephritidae) attractants.Environ. Entomol. 11:1294–1298.Google Scholar
  35. Reissig, W.H., Weires, R.W., Forshey, C.G., Roelofs, W.L., Lamb, R.C., Aldwinckle, H.S., andAlm, S.R. 1984. Management of the apple maggot,Rhagoletis pomonella, in disease resistant dwarf and semi-dwarf apple trees.Environ. Entomol. 13:684–690.Google Scholar
  36. Reissig, W.H., Stanley, B.H., Roelofs, W.L., andSchwarz, M.R. 1985. Tests of synthetic apple volatiles in traps as attractants for apple maggot flies in commercial apple orchards.Environ. Entomol. 14:55–59.Google Scholar
  37. Robert, P.C. 1986. Les relations plantes-insectes phytophages chez les femelles pondeuses: Le role des stimulus chimiques et physiques. Une mise au point bibliographique.Agronomie 6:127–142.Google Scholar
  38. Roitberg, B.D. 1985. Search dynamics in fruit-parasitic insects.J. Insect Physiol. 31:865–872.Google Scholar
  39. Saxena, K.N., andSaxena, R.C. 1975. Patterns of relationships between certain leafhoppers and plants, Part III. Range and interaction of sensory stimuli.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 18:194–206.Google Scholar
  40. Sokal, R.F., andRohlf, F.J. 1981. Biometry. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco. 859 pp.Google Scholar
  41. Swift, F.C. 1982. Field tests of visual and chemical lures for apple maggot flies.J. Econ. Entomol. 75:201–206.Google Scholar
  42. Todd, J.L., Phelan, P.L., andNault, L.R. 1990. Interaction between visual and olfactory stimuli during host-finding by leafhopper,Dalbulus maidis (Homoptera: Cicadellidae).J. Chem. Ecol. 16:2121–2133.Google Scholar
  43. Torr, S.J. 1988. The activation of resting tsetse flies (Glossina) in response to visual and olfactory stimuli in the field.Physiol. Entomol. 13:315–325.Google Scholar
  44. Torr, S.J. 1989. The host-orientated behaviour of tsetse flies (Glossina): The interaction of visual and olfactory stimuli.Physiol. Entomol. 14:325–340.Google Scholar
  45. Weatherston, I., Miller, D., andDohse, L. 1985a. Capillaries as controlled release devices for insect pheromones and other volatile substances-a reevaluation Part I. Kinetics and development of predictive model for glass capillaries.J. Chem. Ecol. 11:953–965.Google Scholar
  46. Weatherston, I., Miller, D., andLavoie-Dornik, J. 1985b. Capillaries as controlled release devices for insect pheromones and other volatile substances—a reevaluation Part II. Predicting release rates from Celcon and Teflon capillaries.J. Chem. Ecol. 11:967–978.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Aluja
    • 1
  • Ronald J. Prokopy
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EntomologyUniversity of MassachusettsAmherst
  2. 2.Institute de Ecología, A.C.Xalapa, VeracruzMexico

Personalised recommendations